Month: February 2010

The Philippines’ May 2010 election "circus" has begun. Six candidates are vying for the top seat. The winner will become the 15th President of the Philippines. The ff. lists descriptions of who my presidentiable is (or, to be exact, who is not my presidentiable):

Does not use the "for the poor" theme, and all related variations, in his campaign. This popular theme has been overused by many candidates in many past elections already. I’d rather that the candidate be more specific about the problems that are making life hard and what are the solution he’s planning for each. To just recognize the poor does not mean anything. Knowing what the problem is and what can be done are what we need.

Does not ride with popularity, neither from his own nor from others. It should be enough for the candidate to lay down his own platform and to stand up for his own ideals to gain the popularity he needs. It is neither about the famous him nor about his famous supporters. It’s about his brand of politics.

Does not keep himself in the shadows of his endorsers. I don’t want to see his proponents. I want to see the candidate for who he really is and for what he really fights for. I want to know what he really believes in. I want to see what he’s really planning. I want to know that he is really in control.

Does not mix up religion with matters of the state. Focus is the name of the game. It’s not about being right all the time. It’s about being in the right place doing the right thing at the right time. Religion and politics don’t mix. Period.

Does not proclaim that he wants to be a king again. If this is the first statement I’ll hear from a candidate, how much more selfishness can I expect from him? The presidency is not the power. The power should be from the person himself, humbled by the privilege of being elected as the president. Selfish bastards think only of themselves. You don’t have to read between the lines to know what his plans are. The way I see it, he’s only thinking of himself.

Does not prioritize himself as a businessman. A businessman is interested in profits. Even with conflicts of interests aside, a businessman thinks in the context of gains. Let’s face the facts. The facts are dirty. They can be dismissed as dirty politics bringing old news back to life. However, they are facts, nonetheless, and that’s what matters. I digressed, but you know what I’m talking about… The Philippines is not one big business to deal with. It is not for sale. It is not for lease. It is not for rent. The Philippines is a state. It is a nation. It is a country that our ancestors have fought hard for us to call our own. We should all benefit from that fact, not just that one businessman who’ve invested so much in orchestrating the perfect law-twisting crimes in history.

I want a candidate who is specific with what to focus on and who is detailed about how to act on them. I want the one who can show his plans with numbers, dates and figures. I want the one who can prove what he knows. I want the one who can prove what he can. I want the one who differentiates himself from the pack. I want a solid leader: with a solid character, with a solid attitude and with a solid plan for the country. That one is my presidentiable. That one is my president.

In the early days of computing, the norm was to think about computer-based solutions in terms of hardware, software and peopleware. Although we have evolved to using terms like "IT", "infrastructure", "architecture" and "cloud", it cannot be denied that the basics stay. Think about it: as primitive as it may seem, all else fails, the morse code rules; all else fails, the typewriter is your friend; and all else fails, a hand fan works just the same. If you go back to its roots, regardless of its size and shape, the computer was, is and will always be about the hardware, the software and the peopleware.

Over the years, computing industries developed vertically with companies focusing on hardware only, software only and peopleware only products and services. Although vertical focus would remain to be practiced for decades to come, it seems to have reached its peak. Over the past 10 years, companies are bravely venturing back to delivering "computers" in full form complete with the hardware itself, the software to run in it and the peopleware to support them. It is no longer about making devices available. It is no longer about making application programs available. It is no longer about people making the overall product actually useful.

The hardware is nothing without its software, and vise versa, but both are nothing without the users and the people behind them. All three should be in place and should work together in harmony. Each one contributes to the success of the other. The progress of one progresses the other. They should all grow and mature at the same time. None of them should be able to overwhelm or, even, underwhelm the other. They should compliment each other. Suffice to say, the interdependency is inevitable.

A computer-based solution should be ready for immediate use and to deliver its value in the present time. It can neither be ahead nor behind of its time. What is a device capable of if it can’t run the applications developed to run in it? What is an application for if there is no device available that’s capable of running it? What’s the purpose of both if there is no one who’d actually find the value to use them or to even invest on them? After all, failed expectations are opportunities lost.

This is the context of synchronized innovation where, all things in balance, nothing should ever go to waste…

Wireless HD, as the name implies, enables the wireless delivery of rich content from a device to a display device. If you think about it, computers don’t really need to have a monitor/screen installed in order to work. What’s important is that the user would have a way to interact with the computer when needed.

Now picture this: computer + wireless HD + display device (with multi-touch, audio and haptics capability). The display device doesn’t do anything by itself. The user would only use it to remotely access an actual computer which should have all the much needed computing power and Internet connectivity.

Now let’s say you can configure a display device to also access a mobile gadget (headset or wallet form factor). Now what if, that little gadget is actually a full-pledged mobile computer/smartphone with telecommunication features? It’s an awesome possibillity.

The physical separation of the display from the computer (or smartphone) should happen. I strongly believe that Wireless HD will make that happen. It should happen and it should happen soon. ‘Coz I like!